Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

It you put the entire world's population in Texas, each person would have a 47x47 foot piece of land for themselves.

That's right. Every single person on our planet would fit inside Texas. So would 8 billion. Time to tell the media to start reporting the truth and not sensationalist journalism to induce fear for political gain.

It you put the entire world's population in Texas, each person would have a 47x47 foot piece of land for themselves.

That's right. Every single person on our planet would fit inside Texas. So would 8 billion. Time to tell the media to start reporting the truth and not sensationalist journalism to induce fear for political gain.

Occupy the Media! Make the World a Safer Place!

The problem is that the media are largely ignorant, so they have little bearing on the best perspective to put things in...and they are competing for market share more than anything else. Then again, space isn't the issue here. Resource demand is.
When I visited Steung Meanchey, for example, they had plenty of room living 3 families in a smaller sized area as my 30'x70' home. Space is beside the point where population is concerned; it has rarely, if ever been the problem. People wo talk of space for why population size matters are right for the wrong reasons.

Well I think a modern human being would need more than 2,000-3,000 sqft for sustainability. I'm no expert but taking into account water, plant and animal life, resources, energy needs, etc., that area looks kinda tight. Maybe 10x that area is still not enough. Furthermore there's got to be an environmental limit to how many methane-producing machines the planet can hold (cows are already a hot spot!). And in Texas I assume everyone will want to drive a truck. Anyway maybe we shouldn't worry now, but population control has to be a topic at some point (10? 20 Billion? I'll let the experts decide).

Shoulder to shoulder, the entire world's population would fit in Marion County Indiana. Malthus first brought the population issue as it relates to resources to the forefront. Of course he didn't imagine the technological breakthroughs in agriculture that occurred.

The world is potentially capable of supporting 7 billion people, but not the way things stand. The minority overuses the majority of the planet's resources. Peak oil has been reached. Water shortages are going to become a serious issues worldwide. As long as we keep this imaginary lines in the sand drawn and those in power continue to act irresponsibly this planet is doomed.

Shoulder to shoulder, the entire world's population would fit in Marion County Indiana. Malthus first brought the population issue as it relates to resources to the forefront. Of course he didn't imagine the technological breakthroughs in agriculture that occurred.

The world is potentially capable of supporting 7 billion people, but not the way things stand. The minority overuses the majority of the planet's resources. Peak oil has been reached. Water shortages are going to become a serious issues worldwide. As long as we keep this imaginary lines in the sand drawn and those in power continue to act irresponsibly this planet is doomed.

Before I became a geographer, I wasn't nearly so pessimistic.

Before I took geography and environmental science classes I was only going off popular trends of "common sense." Clean water alone is such a potentially huge issue, for a variety of reasons. From rivers catching fire several times (thank you clean air and water act), to estrogen and caffeine levels in the Mississippi, to drought issues, the impact we currently have on the environment begs several well-founded questions the media is simply doing its best to make a business of repeating down the social communication lines. Throw population increases in and it compounds these issues further.
The media has been suspect in its reports since it began in all its prototypes; Yellow Journalism has been around since communities have had vested interests in what other people think. Yes, occupy the media; make them accountable for what they say, but the balance between population and resource management is always a valid concern for people who look forward to the future of their society.
Recently the Daily Show has had a couple awesome bits on the, frankly, BS nature of the anti-science movement in our culture today (propagated by various media outlets). I cannot believe the things some people say; with such faith that they don't bother to think too much about it. There is no doubt people manipulate what they can in order to make an easier way in the world, but rarely are their fields where critical review is so much a part of the process.
Absolutely: Occupy the Media. Make them accountable for mindless sensationalism and demand reason-based reporting.

Recently the Daily Show has had a couple awesome bits on the, frankly, BS nature of the anti-science movement in our culture today (propagated by various media outlets). I cannot believe the things some people say; with such faith that they don't bother to think too much about it. There is no doubt people manipulate what they can in order to make an easier way in the world, but rarely are their fields where critical review is so much a part of the process.
Absolutely: Occupy the Media. Make them accountable for mindless sensationalism and demand reason-based reporting.

I think that way about "science", too. More specifically, Global Warming. There is no sound science for the sensationalistic hype of Global Warming. Much of it was merely hype and Chicken Little yelling the Sky is Falling. It was more like a religious cult than valid, proven science. It echoed the extremely recent "An Ice Age is Coming!" mentality. (By recent, I mean in Earth's time frame. For us, it was somewhere around the 70s-80s.)

I think most of us agree, though, that Media should be held accountable for what they print. Not holding my breath for it, though.

Shoulder to shoulder, the entire world's population would fit in Marion County Indiana. Malthus first brought the population issue as it relates to resources to the forefront. Of course he didn't imagine the technological breakthroughs in agriculture that occurred.

The world is potentially capable of supporting 7 billion people, but not the way things stand. The minority overuses the majority of the planet's resources. Peak oil has been reached. Water shortages are going to become a serious issues worldwide. As long as we keep this imaginary lines in the sand drawn and those in power continue to act irresponsibly this planet is doomed.

Before I became a geographer, I wasn't nearly so pessimistic.

Actually, the Earth is currently supporting 7 billion people. Media wants us to think otherwise. Peak oil has not been reached. There are still vast fields not even begun to being tapped. Again, media sensationalistic fear. And unless the Earth has some sort of hole in its system, then we kind of live in a ... hmmm what's the best term ... a terrarium. Water is recycled by nature. Water shortages are only because of failing filtration systems, which can be fixed.

I laugh every time I go into the restroom now. There are signs saying that the electric dryers save 5 trees a year. What they don't tell you is that whole hillsides are being strip mined for the coal to power the electric plant that supplies power to that dryer. Nor do they tell you of the contaminants (mercury) coming from the coal plants. So, yeah, let's save 5 trees a year so that we can kill 10000 more plus poison the fish in our waters.

And now, I see "water less" urinals. LOL! That are "green". Uh huh. Just another way for the company to cut down on its costs. No water means less of a water bill. Bazinga!

I think it is more an issue of inequity in distribution than sheer numbers...a couple of thoughts:

Globalization of food burns incredible amounts of fossil fuel for transport + adds middleman costs like mad + creates more opportunities for distribution problems versus regional food independence via actually growing grains, legumes, vegetables and fruit for people to eat within the region (I am not ruling out specialty crops like say coffee or pineapple or tea that have limited regions, but there is no reason to turn vast tracts into plantations for export without keeping land in production to fill local's bellies)

Water use....for anybody who is interested in US water policy, I recommend "Cadillac Desert" about the folly of dams and "making the desert bloom".... meanwhile current statistics are still that a huge amount of US fresh water resource goes to watering lawns. Oh don't get me started....

Actually, the Earth is currently supporting 7 billion people. Media wants us to think otherwise. Peak oil has not been reached. There are still vast fields not even begun to being tapped. Again, media sensationalistic fear.

The media wants us to buy their product...or to justify their advertising charges. Beyond that, I think they're mostly just like other lay people. Some expert says, "the population is reaching unheard-of growth rates," or, "global temp. seems to be raising, which could have bad results," and they worry; they read their own understanding (lack thereof) into it. On some level this is accounted for through specialization of fields in journalism, but too often familiarity doesn't equate to expertize. There is so much top-down reasoning in society: "we pay our executives the most because we want the best." The presumption is that the best are the most attracted to money. BS. The best are the ones most attracted to being the best and checking their work...generally speaking. I'd even make an argument that there is a correlation between not-seeking money and expertize because it's a more direct motivation...it's not mitigated by that secondary factor. I think you can see other cases where taking money is secondary to the progression of the field of study.
As it relates to global population, yes, "we" are being sustained insofar as "we" still exist, but some regions are more volatile; some more delicate. To speak of how sustained "we" are seems to negate these areas. It's a lot like climate change/global warming: some areas will enjoy the change, others will not. Most people today don't want to get involved in the process. Look at how much people vote compared to how much they complain about politics. Uh oh! Miss Anthropy is waking up...better put'er to sleep by watching one of the miracles of nature: the drool of a smiling baby.
Take care,
Matt

The media wants us to buy their product...or to justify their advertising charges. Beyond that, I think they're mostly just like other lay people. Some expert says, "the population is reaching unheard-of growth rates," or, "global temp. seems to be raising, which could have bad results," and they worry; they read their own understanding (lack thereof) into it. On some level this is accounted for through specialization of fields in journalism, but too often familiarity doesn't equate to expertize. There is so much top-down reasoning in society: "we pay our executives the most because we want the best." The presumption is that the best are the most attracted to money. BS. The best are the ones most attracted to being the best and checking their work...generally speaking. I'd even make an argument that there is a correlation between not-seeking money and expertize because it's a more direct motivation...it's not mitigated by that secondary factor. I think you can see other cases where taking money is secondary to the progression of the field of study.
As it relates to global population, yes, "we" are being sustained insofar as "we" still exist, but some regions are more volatile; some more delicate. To speak of how sustained "we" are seems to negate these areas. It's a lot like climate change/global warming: some areas will enjoy the change, others will not. Most people today don't want to get involved in the process. Look at how much people vote compared to how much they complain about politics. Uh oh! Miss Anthropy is waking up...better put'er to sleep by watching one of the miracles of nature: the drool of a smiling baby.
Take care,
Matt

The vast majority of media outlets are controlled by precious few corporations. The news that we are spoon-fed is conveniently distorted to fit the messages that those particular corporations would like us to believe. Those corporations tend to be split on both sides of the ideological aisle. Finding fair and balanced news is becoming increasingly difficult. Issues become distorted so people can no longer have intelligent conversations about the real issues involved.

For example- Who gives a damn whether or not 7 billion people can fit in Texas. That gives us little useful information about how we are utilizing earth's resources to sustain these people.

For example- Who gives a damn if you believe that we are causing global warming. The real question is whether or not we can influence this process in a way that makes our world more sustainable.

The Media are irritating at times. They (all) are on a kick about the 7 billionth person being born. And how the world is overpopulated, food shortages, yada yada yada. Do the math, people!

I think your math has a few variables missing. Hey you could join the media, I believe they always have openings for non experts willing to open their pie-holes on various subjects to distill complicated subjects into "common sense".

I think your math has a few variables missing. Hey you could join the media, I believe they always have openings for non experts willing to open their pie-holes on various subjects to distill complicated subjects into "common sense".

Be the media.

Well, ya know, being from West Virginia, we all don't count too high. In fact, we jus count to 21. We start with one hand for 5, then the other hand gets us to 10, then we take off a shoe to gets us to 15 and then tha other shoe to get to 20. Have ta drop the pants for 21. Women folk can only count to 20.

Shoot, ya should have seen me trying to count ta 7 billion. Why, I had to call the family. Billy Bob, Bobby Jo, Jo Billy, Harold (we don think he's really from West Virginia), Bobby Sue, Bobby Jean, Jeannie Sue, er well, ya knows our family tree goes straight up, right? Anyways, I may have missed a few relatives in tha count. And gettin the square foot of Texas ... whew, talk about having to call relatives I ain't ever wanted ta talk to. When I said square foot, they all got out the fiddles and started playing. Thought I meant square dancing or flat footing or both. They was mighty mad when I tole em I wanted ta do some rithmatic.

Yeppers, I might have missed a few things in them there calculations. We're just simple folk out here in West Virginia. Most nights, we just sit on the porch using our pie-holes to yak. Most times, that's when we've had too many beans for breakfast. Add a lighter and wow, does that night sky light up real bright like.

But we do know that when there aren't any jobs, you have to move. The last hard times saw a major outflux of people leaving West Virginia to go where the jobs were located. We do know that when times are tough, family pulls together. We have a church every mile where people congregate to help other people. We smile and say hi to strangers. We watch out for our neighbors. We have a volunteer program every hunting season where hunters can donate a deer to a butcher who processes it for food bank programs. People who need food have an option for free food. We know enough not to build a house on the side of a steep, rocky mountain. Not to just go running onto another person's property without being polite and asking. When we lied, we got our mouth washed out with soap. When we did something really wrong, we got whipped. We learned to say yes ma'am and yes sir and how to be polite to people. How that doing something wrong just because the end might be justified is still doing something wrong.

But hey, I'm just a redneck, hick, ridgerunner, hillbilly from West Virginia who can only count to 21 with his clothes off. What do I know?

Well, ya know, being from West Virginia, we all don't count too high. In fact, we jus count to 21. We start with one hand for 5, then the other hand gets us to 10, then we take off a shoe to gets us to 15 and then tha other shoe to get to 20. Have ta drop the pants for 21. Women folk can only count to 20.

Shoot, ya should have seen me trying to count ta 7 billion. Why, I had to call the family.

But hey, I'm just a redneck, hick, ridgerunner, hillbilly from West Virginia who can only count to 21 with his clothes off. What do I know?

Frankly, with all that's wrong with this country today in general and with the media specifically, it would have taken me quite a while to get around to criticizing them for reporting that there are 7 billion people on earth when there are, in fact, 7 billion people on earth.

Frankly, with all that's wrong with this country today in general and with the media specifically, it would have taken me quite a while to get around to criticizing them for reporting that there are 7 billion people on earth when there are, in fact, 7 billion people on earth.

Only they aren't just reporting 7 billion. They go on to talk about the drain on resources, "nearly overpopulated", gov't control of births, how much can this planet withstand, etc, etc, etc. They do this, not through science, but by the very number being seeeeevvvvvvveeeeeennnn billlllllliiioooonnn. The Earth cannot hope to withstand that many people living on it. That's a mighty big number and look over here in this malnourished, poverty stricken area. See, they can't survive. The Earth doesn't have the resources to sustain us. yada yada yada.

Long has the media brought false information, misleading information, and outright lies to the public. Instead of camping out on Wall Street, how about Occupy the Media so that the public can actually get true, correct information? Course, you can always show up at the Occupy Wall Street crowd and talk to quite a lot of media employees. No, not covering the story, they're part of the crowd. I guess they didn't understand "journalistic integrity".

Long has the media brought false information, misleading information, and outright lies to the public. Instead of camping out on Wall Street, how about Occupy the Media so that the public can actually get true, correct information? Course, you can always show up at the Occupy Wall Street crowd and talk to quite a lot of media employees. No, not covering the story, they're part of the crowd. I guess they didn't understand "journalistic integrity".

Setting aside this issue of population, if you can, if you understand how few individuals own the mainstream media you might see the two are one in the same problem.